Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hlthe2b

(106,984 posts)
1. It is not clear that they were able to "standardize" the antibodies available via the convalescent
Wed Sep 1, 2021, 05:55 PM
Sep 2021

plasma. Given we still "lump" all neutralizing antibodies (without identifying the one or more most important to combatting COVID-19 and especially the delta variant currently at different phases of infection--monoclonal antibody products, notwithstanding) and have likewise NOT identified the threshold levels of antibody necessary for effective combatting of COVID-19 and especially the delta variant at different phases of infection, this brings up a lot of questions.

Bottom line, I think in future years as we acquire more knowledge of the immunology evolution in natural infection versus those receiving passive antibody (plasma or monoclonal antibody treatments) and active antibody (vaccines), we will look on this study as very limited and perhaps even invalid.

That said, I would have loved to see a third arm of this study with a monoclonal antibody product administered in comparison.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Health»NIH study at Stanford say...»Reply #1